Does Defer write work?

[Mradr]

It seem to work speed wise, but from what I get from the demo selection is if I place lets say 4MB on the drive and then remove it, the Write bytes (Deferred, Normal) will be 0 or less than that? Looking at the monitor it seem to write the 4MB after my latency kicks in.

[Support]

To avoid writing deleted data, you need Windows 7 (or later) and NTFS partition.
Please see
http://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/fanc ... rites.html

[Mradr]

To avoid writing deleted data, you need Windows 7 (or later) and NTFS partition.
Please see
http://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/fanc ... rites.html

Yes I have window 7... I was trying it on a exfat, and today I did it on a NTFS.. seems to do the same thing... if I copy and past the file into the location, and then delete it, it still shows it is writing data to the disk when no data should be writen.

Does this sound right?

L1 1GB

Write Bytes (T): 4068 kb
Deferring Blocks (C): 2 (0 when it writes)
Trimmed Blocks (T): 0
Write Bytes (D U): 0 kb
Write Bytes (D M) 4068 kb
Writes IOS (S): 4 to 21
Write IO (F): 0
Total IO: 23

[Support]

It needs to wait about 30sec ~ 1min to know what data can be skipped. So FC latency value shall be larger than 1 min.

[Mradr]

Still not doing what you all say it will...:

It's an SSD... MKNSSDCR60GB
NTFS
DisableDeleteNotify = 0

Data = 76MB zip file.

L1 = 128MB
LRU
Write-Only
Release After Write = true
Latency = 60sec


Write B: 76MB
Deferring (some number shows)
Trimmed (stays 0)
Write B (DU): 0
Write B (DN): 76MB
Write IO (S): 82
write IO (F): 0
Total IO: 324

Only differents I see is that my TRIM command isn't being called or doesn't want to call it... Are you all counting on that the windows 7 (64bit) will always issues this command? If so, that's a bad idea it seems.

[Support]

What if you set Latency to a larger value such as 600 sec? Just for testing.
Thanks.

[Mradr]

Setting it to a larger timer seem to work. Atm it is set to 90 instead of just 60 (so a min and a half). Any reason as to why that is so? Also, it still will write data (not that much compare to what it was saving, but still some) even if I delete the item. What data is it writing? Is it just updating the file system?

Oh, yea... ran into another werid issue. Settign the cache (L1) to 128mb does not stop FancyCache from using more ram than that. If I let my computer run for a few days... FC will be hitting somewhere around 3GBs instead of being limited to just the 128mb... Why is that?

[Support]

What data is it writing? Is it just updating the file system?

Perhaps by the following 2 reasons,
1) data were written to update the file system
2) data were written before the program knew they shall be skipped.

FC will be hitting somewhere around 3GBs instead of being limited to just the 128mb... Why is that?

Did you enable L2 SSD caching?

[Mradr]

Yes I do have L2, but I set it up to be another HDD instead of the SSD. The 2nd HDD doesn't have a L1 cache.

[Support]

Well, this issue may be caused by L2 cache. You may stop L2 caching and then check the results.

PS. We are re-designing L2 caching mechanisim, trying to fix these issues and make L2 caching more efficient.